Posted on 04/02/2013 10:50:54 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
We somehow missed this yesterday, but Newsbusters certainly didn’t, and it’s worth a look even a day later. The New York Times, with reporters around the world and “layers of fact-checkers and editors,” somehow couldn’t properly define Easter in a news article that focused on Pope Francis’ message on Christianity’s most holy of days. This correction has to be a contender for the most hilarious of the year:
This article has been revised to reflect the following correction:
Correction: April 1, 2013
An earlier version of this article mischaracterized the Christian holiday of Easter. It is the celebration of Jesus’s resurrection from the dead, not his resurrection into heaven.
Clay Waters at Newsbusters resurrected the original paragraph, emphasis his:
Easter is the celebration of the resurrection into heaven of Jesus, three days after he was crucified, the premise for the Christian belief in an everlasting life. In urging peace, Francis called on Jesus to ”change hatred into love, vengeance into forgiveness, war into peace.”
Even the correction is in error. Easter celebrates Jesus’ resurrection from the dead three days after he was crucified, but his ascension into Heaven was not a “resurrection” at all.
One has to wonder why no one bothered to run this by Ross Douthat, who writes an intriguing column for the New York Times that often reflects on his Catholic faith. For that matter, one has to wonder why none of the layers of fact-checkers and editors missed this egregious error prior to publication — or why they have assigned a reporter to cover the Pope’s Easter message who has no understanding of the event itself. Ross would have been the more natural choice to write a report on Francis’ Easter address rather than Elisabetta Povoledo, their correspondent in Rome who has oddly not bothered to familiarize herself with even the most basic facts of the religion practiced in the Vatican.
Part of the problem for the NYT is the lack of a religion section, and a religion editor. At one time, most newspapers had a particular section dealing with news stories about faith and religions, which presumably would have lent enough expertise to at least catch this kind of ignorance before it hit the newsstand and the Internet. With newspapers facing tough budget choices, it’s not difficult to understand why a section on religion might be considered expendable, especially for a publication that serves an increasingly secular market. However, the lack of an editor with at least some basic knowledge (and a reporter who checks her assumptions) will eventually lead to silly, avoidable, and credibility-damaging errors like the original story and the still-erroneous correction. It might have also avoided some of the ignorant opinion pieces offered by the Gray Lady during the papal transition, which one can find via a search on “Benedict XVI.”
If the New York Times wants to cover religion, then it had better find reporters and editors who understand it, at least if they want to maintain that they have any credibility to perform those functions.
There was a time (last century, I believe) that I actually believed things I read in the Times.
How far the (once) mighty have fallen.
It doesn't help them that any Christian with knowledge of the Bible makes for a better editor than anyone they have on their staff.
The New York Times LIED and COVERED UP a Huge Soviet induced mass famine in the Ukraine as early as 1932.
That famine genocide of 1932-1933 that took the lives of 7-10 million Ukrainians. Known as the Holodomor (Ukrainian for “murder by hunger”), it is one of the greatest mass murders in history, and one of the cruelest.
The Time’s Moscow Bureau Chief of The New York Times Walter Duranty won a Pulitzer Prize in 1932 for a series of laudatory stories on the Soviet Union. He was a highly respected journalist until his denial of widespread famine in the USSR, the Ukraine mass starvation in particular.
He lied for the Soviets before, during and after 1932-1933. Stalin’s apologist did not merit a Pultizer Prize.
So what did the New York Times do? THEY KEPT the Pulitizer Prize and are still keeping it today.
They even get the correction wrong. Jesus wasn't "resurrected" into heaven He ascended into heaven, thus the traditional term "the ascension" to describe it.
I am not surprised. I sing in a Christian men’s choir in Calgary, Alberta. We have 60+ members from 30+ churches in 12 denominations and sing approximately once per month at various churches in the area. In early March, we sang at a certain United Church of Canada church. The Minister was away on vacation and the woman who led the service, mentioned twice during the service, that it was the second Sunday of ‘ADVENT’!
While I do not like singing in such non-Biblical ‘churches’, I realized long ago, that my singing is not about whether I like it, but it is about the Lord’s will. He showed me that our music may be the only ‘truth’ that some people hear, when they attend such churches.
Of course they can’t. Separation of church and state.
Nah ... throw it into the lake of fire.
Actually I celebrate Passover, which is the recognition that Jesus’ death on the cross was sufficient to cover our sins. I’m not really into Easter - the bunny rabbit and Easter egg thing. Passover is mentioned in the Bible - Easter is not.
Just like Christmas, Easter has been hijacked by the bunny, candy, presents and overspending on and indulging children. Ask any child under the age of, oh, say, 10 years old, and they will not associate Easter with Jesus. It really is a secular holiday.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.